Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: rellimpank
The 2012 primary campaign has been an exaggerated version of this dynamic, with one credentialed ex-moderate running against a social conservative who served only five years in the House, a marketing whiz who was a political half-wit, a former speaker dethroned by his caucus, an ex-senator who lost his last race by 18 points, a 76-year-old member of the House with an eccentric agenda, and a four-term Texas governor whose résumé was impressive, but who tripped over his tongue and his feet. It took no manipulation by sinister forces to eliminate most of them. Conservatives did run, but not the best of them. This was not a dark RINO plot.

I agree with this. Anyone want to disagree ?

The fact is the resumes of the not Romneys are not as solid as Romney. We don't even refer to the not Romneys by their real names, only that they are not Romney.

17 posted on 02/26/2012 9:15:41 AM PST by staytrue
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: staytrue
I halfway disagree.

What Romney brings to the table is money. The establishment and especially consultant class, loves self-funders and thinks one can win on that alone. What it does do is scare a lot of people from running in the first place, so that we are stuck with a lot like what we have here.

18 posted on 02/26/2012 9:28:21 AM PST by Darren McCarty (Stop Romney - Rick Santorum in the Michigan primary)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies ]

To: staytrue; onyx; Darksheare; Graybeard58; 50mm; TheOldLady
The 2012 primary campaign has been an exaggerated version of this dynamic, with one credentialed ex-moderate running against a social conservative who served only five years in the House, a marketing whiz who was a political half-wit, a former speaker dethroned by his caucus, an ex-senator who lost his last race by 18 points, a 76-year-old member of the House with an eccentric agenda, and a four-term Texas governor whose résumé was impressive, but who tripped over his tongue and his feet. It took no manipulation by sinister forces to eliminate most of them. Conservatives did run, but not the best of them. This was not a dark RINO plot.

---------------------------------------------------------

I agree with this. Anyone want to disagree ?

The fact is the resumes of the not Romneys are not as solid as Romney. We don't even refer to the not Romneys by their real names, only that they are not Romney.

=========================================================

Yes, I disagree.

This is just another article attempting to ridicule Conservatives who are recognizing the inbred conditions that have arisen between those known to be against Conservatives, and those previously assumed to be friends and supporters of Conservatives.

Romney's resume is solid alright, so solidly identified here on FR as not Conservative, that pushing for him on this forum has clearly been identified as a no-no by the site owner.

If you want to continue to participate on FR, I suggest you reconsider your inputs carefully from this point forward.

Also, I don't know who you are referring to as "We", but the other candidates are regularly referred to by their names on FR, vice always being referred to as "not-Romneys".

19 posted on 02/26/2012 10:22:44 AM PST by Col Freeper (FR is a smorgasbord of Conservative thoughts and ideas - dig in and enjoy it to its fullest!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies ]

To: staytrue; Col Freeper; onyx; Graybeard58; 50mm; TheOldLady

Romney’s record is solid?
You mean, his support for homosexual marriage, abortion, gun bans, taxpayer funded government run healthcare, perpetual government bailouts for failed businesses at taxpayer expense?
That’s a record you like?


21 posted on 02/26/2012 12:22:16 PM PST by Darksheare (You will never defeat Bok Choy!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies ]

To: staytrue

Seriously? Romney’s resume is better than Newt’s? It’s one of the worst of the bunch. He lost the Senate to Ted Kennedy by the same amount Santorum lost, difference being Santorum actually got elected twice before. Mitt was a failed one-term governor who was so unpopular he declined to run for reelection. By that logic, the only mistake Santorum made that made him worse than Romney was trying to run for a 3rd term instead of giving up early. Then compare to Newt, who led the Republicans to take over the House after 40 years, a majority they held onto for 12 years. You also have to buy this woman’s assertion that Mitt is an “ex-moderate,” and not someone who spent his whole political career as a moderate and then claimed he was a conservative as soon as he started running his presidential campaign.


22 posted on 02/26/2012 12:24:26 PM PST by JediJones (Watch "Gingrich to Michigan: Change or Die" on YouTube. Best Speech Ever!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies ]

To: staytrue

Speaker Gingrich the conservative leader of the 1990s and history maker, has an incredible resume.

Romney as a Mormon Bishop and a failed liberal, one term Governor that couldn’t win reelection, does not come off as well.


29 posted on 02/26/2012 4:01:39 PM PST by ansel12 (Romney is unquestionably the weakest party front-runner in contemporary political history.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson